MEMORANDUM 6 July 2010
To:Members of the DevelopmentFrom Legal and Member Services
Control Committee
Chief OfficersAsk forAdrian Service
Ext25564
Minicom6611
My RefAS/
Your Ref______
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
22JUNE 2010
MINUTES
ATTENDANCE
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
D Andrews (substituting for B N W Hammond(Chairman)), P Bibby (substituting for N K Brook), R F Cheswright, G R Churchard, D S Drury, D B Lloyd (substituting for C L Berry),
C A Mitchell (substituting for P A Ruffles), M D R Muir, J M Pitman (substituting for E T Roach), W A Storey, J W A Usher (Vice – Chairman – chairing the meeting),
C B Wyatt – Lowe.
Also in Attendance
B J Lamb.
Upon consideration of the agenda for the Development Control Committee meeting on
22June 2010, as circulated, copy annexed, action was taken or decisions were reached
on individual items as recorded below.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of C L Berry, N K Brook,
B N W Hammond, D A A Peek, E T Roach, P A Rufflesand S J Taylor.
In the absence of the Chairman, B N W Hammond, the Vice – Chairman,
J W A Usher chaired the meeting.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Committee meeting held on 25May2010 were confirmed as an accurate record.
PUBLIC PETITIONS
No petitions to be presentedto this meeting,on items not detailed on the agenda had
been received.
NOTIFICATION OF OTHER BUSINESS
None notified.
MOTIONS
None notified.
1.THREE RIVERS DISTRICT –APPLICATION FOR THE REGISTRATION OF LAND AT THE PADDOCK, RICKMANSWORTH AS A TOWN OR VILLAGE GREEN
[Officer contact Andrea TrendlerTel : 01992 555280]
Mr R Seedher, oneof the two applicants made a presentation supporting the application to register the land as a town or village green. He viewed that the area of the neighbourhood should be amended, as the application did not reflect the neighbourhood. In particular he felt the Inspector who conducted the Public Inquiry had not followed the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs guidance on neighbourhood and locality and that his report was inconsistent with High Court decisions. He said the use had been for 20 years by local residents and he did not want his application to fail on a technicality. Furthermore he felt that no application for registration of a village green should be dismissed on locality alone.
Mr M Barnes, on behalf the landowner, Three Rivers District Council, made a presentation opposing the application to register the land as a village or town green.
He requested the Committee to accept the independent Inspector’s recommendation. He stated that the applicant, despite being given several opportunities had failed to demonstrate his case and the inspector’s recommendation of 1 March 2010 remained unchanged. The applicant now wanted to adjust the area to fit the evidence.
The Definitive Map Officer for the Three Rivers District, Rights of Way Service, Environment & Commercial Services Department outlined the main aspects in considering this application which were set out in the Inspector’s Main Report, Summary Report, Further Noteof 6 April 2010 and Supplementary Report of
7 June 2010 attached as Appendices2 to 4 of the submitted Committee report.
In response to a question, the Definitive Map Officer for the Three Rivers District stated that either the land owner or applicant could apply to judicially review the decision taken bythe Committee to register or to not register the land as a village green.
Reference was made to the site visit undertaken in particular the overgrown nature of most of the land including the path especially near to the school site. It was wondered why Three Rivers District Council, as landowner, had not been more
pro - active of making good use of this area of land. It was suggested that
Mr M Barnes advise his District Council colleagues of the Committee’s wish for the path on the land to be maintained so it could be used to access AmettsHillJMISchool.
A Committee Member commented that this was the fourth village green application the Committee had considered in recent years and legislation was difficult for such applications. It was observed that generally there was a danger land owners would prevent public from using their land in future (to prevent such applications) which would be to the detriment of the public.
RESOLVED
That for the reasons set out in the report, taking into account the Inspector's Main Report dated 1 March 2010 and the recommendation set out therein, together with the Inspector's subsequent Further Note dated 6 April 2010 and the Inspector’s Supplementary Report of 7 June 2010 and their recommendations, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to reject the application to register land known as ‘the Paddock’, near Arnett Hills JMI School, Rickmansworth as a town or village green
------
[Councillor D S Drury was not in attendance during the discussion or voting on theabove Item. He entered the Council Chamber immediately prior to the start of the discussion on Item 2]
- EAST HERTS DISTRICT - APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE OF THE SITE TO SUI GENERIS (WASTE RECYCLING) TO INCLUDE THE ERECTION OF A WASTE BUILDING AND COVERED STORAGE AREAS, THE CREATION OF A WIDENED ACCESS AND ASSOCIATED WORKS ON LAND ADJACENT TO THE FORMER DAY CARE CENTRE, ON THE CORNER OF MARSH LANE, WARE
[Officer contact Conor GuilfoyleTel : 01992 588670]
Councillor C A Mitchell declared a personal interest as she was asubstitute Member of Lea Valley Regional Park Authority,who had objected to this application but she had never been required to act as substitute member at a meeting. She remained in the Council Chamber and took part in the discussion and voting on this application.
Mr GAllen, on behalf of Ware residents made a presentation and also presented a petition with 393 signatures plus indicated a further 150 more signatures had been added and would be forwarded on, opposing the planning application.
Ms J Moseley on behalf of the applicant made a presentation supporting the planning application.
A revised plan showing the Conservation area which adjoined this site plus more precise indication of location of a pumping station was circulated at the meeting attached to the Order of Business for this meeting
The Development Control Manager, County Development Unit, Environment & Commercial Services Department advised of the concerns expressed by the Environment Agency, East Herts District Council, Ware Town Council, Lea Valley Regional Park Authority plus in excess of 593 residents about this proposal relating to flood risk, increased heavy vehicles movements, height of buildings, risk of pollution to ground water which combined led him to recommend that the application should be refused.
Committee members were concerned about the risk of polluting groundwater, the detrimental affect on residents’ amenity through increased heavy vehicle movements, tall buildings, plus dust and noise problems which combined led them to conclude that whilst some of the issues could be managed by imposition of planning conditions, the favoured option would be to refusethe application.
RESOLVED
That for the reasons set out in the report, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to refuse planning permission for the proposed change of use of land adjacent to the former day care centre, on the corner of Marsh Lane, Ware to sui generis (waste recycling) to include the erection of a waste building and covered storage areas and the creation of a widened access and associated works, for the following reasons
a) The proposed site is not within an area of search for sites for permanent facilities for the re-use, recovery, transfer and recycling of waste as identified in Waste Policy 12 (areas of search for permanent facilities for re-use, recovery, recycling and transfer of waste)of the adopted Waste Local Plan, nor has it been identified in the emerging LDF site allocations as a potential site for waste management.
b)The proposal conflicts with criterion i) of Waste Policy 13 (criteria for facilities for re-use, recovery, recycling, and transfer of waste (except green waste composting) outside areas of search)of the adopted Waste Local Plan as it fails to minimise impact on local or natural environments.
c)The proposal conflicts with criterion iii) of Waste Policy 13 (criteria for facilities for re-use, recovery, recycling, and transfer of waste (except green waste composting) outside areas of search)of the adopted Waste Local Plan as the location of the site is one where visual and landscape impact is a critical issue.
d)The proposal is considered to pose an unacceptable risk to groundwater and therefore conflicts with Waste Policies 1 (Sustainable Development)and 41 (surface water and groundwater resources)of the adopted Waste Local Plan and ENV20 (Groundwater Protection)of the adopted East Herts Local Plan.
e)The proposal, by virtue of its scale and massing, would harm the setting of the conservation area and the wider ‘heritage asset’ as defined in PPS5. It does not comply with policies ENV1 (Design and Environmental Quality)and BH6 (New Developments in Conservation Areas)of the adopted East Herts Local Plan and would be detrimental to the character of the conservation area.
f)The potential for noise pollution and odour generation combined with the proposed hours of operation are considered to pose a threat to the amenity of nearby residents. The proposal therefore conflicts with Waste Policies 2(Need for Waste Management Facilities), 13, 40(Noise), 44(Proximity to Other Land Uses) and East Herts Local Plan policies ENV1 (Design and Environmental Quality)and ENV24(Noise Generating Development).
3. EAST HERTS DISTRICT - APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED VARIATION OF CONDITION 34 AND CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES TO CONDITIONS 33, 43, 47, 48 AND 49 OF PLANNING PERMISSION 3/0842-04 TO INCREASE LEVELS AT SOUTHFIELD WOOD LANDFILL, WATERHALL QUARRY, LOWER HATFIELD ROAD, HERTINGFORDBURY
[Officer contact : Iain LeechTel : 01992 556225]
In response to questions, the Development Control Manager, County Development Unit, Environment & Commercial Services Department advised how the overtipping of materials had come to light and the difficulties experienced in monitoring the settlements of tipped materials on a large site having numerous differing active parts and differing contour levels. He stated that having evaluated various options the best solution for dealing with the overtipped materials was to level and re model the contours of the site rather than excavating and moving the excess materials offsite causing inconvenience to nearby residents through dust, smell and hgv movements. He explained that the degree of settlement of tipped materials was dependant on the weight, type, depth and total amount of materials tipped with a 15% settlement level, being the minimum level given in guidance at thetime of the planning consent being granted.
It was suggested that the proposed planting scheme should involve seeds collected from surrounding areas, which arrangement was used for the Baldock By Pass landscaping scheme.
Committee members expressed the view that lessons learnt from this situation concerning settlement would be borne in mind for future large scale tipping of materials on Hertfordshire sites.
In response to a questionthe Development Control Manager advisedthat the works would involve Footpath 3 Hertingfordbury being closed for a short duration of weeks at most a few months. Due to an alternative footpath being available nearby, no temporary diversion would be necessary.
RESOLVED
That, for the reasons set out in the report, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to grant planning permission for the variation of condition 34 and consequential changes to conditions 33, 43, 47, 48 and 49 of planning permission 3/0842-04 to increase levels at Southfield Wood Landfill, Waterhall Quarry, Lower Hatfield Road, Hertingfordbury, subject to conditions to include:
a)time limit for development/restoration;
a)restoration timetable;
b)hours of operation;
c)noise limits;
d)dust controls;
e)soil handling;
f)drainage details/scheme
g)scheme to remediate any differential settlement ;
h)aftercare scheme;
i)review of aftercare;
j)temporary closure of footpath 3Hertingfordbury;
k)all other relevant conditions attached to planning permission ref 3/084204.
4. BROXBOURNE BOROUGH APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED NEW BUILD 4 CLASSROOM BLOCK, 1 NEW CLASSROOM EXTENSION TO THE EXISTING SCHOOL BUILDING, INTERNAL REFURBISHMENTS AND THE REMODELLING OF THE CAR PARK AT ROSELANDS PRIMARY SCHOOL, HIGH WOOD ROAD, HODDESDON
[Officer contact : Conor GuilfoyleTel : 01992 588670]
Councillor C A Mitchell declared a personal interest as she was aGovernor of the School and a Member of the Education & Skills Cabinet Panel,she left the Council Chamber and took no part in the discussion and voting on this application and the remaining applications Items 5 and 6, which related to Schools building projects considered by that Cabinet Panel.
In response to a question, the Head of the County Development Unit, Environment & Commercial Services Department, stated that it would be possible to give guidance where persons driving to the school or nearby premises could park their vehicles, if a traffic regulation order was promoted to impose waiting restrictions on nearby roads to the school.
RESOLVED
That (a) for the reasons set out in the report, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to grant planning permission for the proposednew build 4 classroom block, 1 new classroom extension to the existing school building, internal refurbishments and the remodelling of the car park at Roselands Primary School, High Wood Road, Hoddesdon, subject to conditions to include:
i)time limit for commencement;
ii)details of contractor compound with access via new grass-crete link only and not through residential development on Plomer Avenue;
iii)details of external lighting to be approved;
iv)archaeology;
v)treatment of retaining wall adjacent to netball court;
vi)landscaping.
vii)Travel Plan
viii)car parking spaces and shared pedestrian/cycleway link to Plomer Avenue to be made available before use of new classroom block.
ix)details of construction arrangements, including wheel wash, construction traffic access, parking and storage of materials.
(b)the applicant be required to promote a Traffic Regulation Order to investigate the necessity of providing parking restrictions on nearby roads.
- HERTSMERE BOROUGH - APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PROVISION OF
2NEW MODULAR CLASSROOM UNITS UNTIL 2018 AND THE RETENTION OF
2 EXISTING MODULAR CLASSROOM UNITS UNTIL 2018 AND THE PROVISION OF 4 NEW PARKING SPACES AT SUMMERSWOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL, FURZEHILL ROAD, BOREHAMWOOD
[Officer contact : Felicity HartTel : 01992 556256]
[Councillor C A Mitchell declared a personal interest as she was a Member of the Education & Skills Cabinet Panel, she left the Council Chamber and took no part in the discussion and voting on this application which had been considered by that Cabinet Panel.]
A Committee Member expressed the view that given the number of mobile classrooms that already existed and were recently being put forward to meet the short fall in school places in Hertfordshire, the Children Schools and Families Department should look more closely at data on new housing being provided in forecasting future school place needs and avoid the need for mobile classrooms.
RESOLVED
That, for the reasons set out in the report, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to grant planning permission for the temporary provision of a new modular double classroom unit until 2018 and the retention of
2 existing modular classroom units until 2018 and the provision of 4 new parking spaces at SummerswoodPrimary School, Furzehill Road, Borehamwood subject to appropriate conditions, to include the following:
a)time limits for implementation and duration
b)contractor parking and compound area;
c)landscape details of replacement trees;
d)car parking;
e)travel plan;
f)removal of the mobile units and reinstatement of the land.
- ST ALBANS DISTRICT – APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED NEW SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO CREATE A 3FE JUNIORSCHOOL, INCLUDING A NEW 33 SPACE CAR PARK AND 27 NEW 1METRE HIGH LIGHT COLUMNS AT
BERNARDSHEATHJUNIORSCHOOL, WATSON AVENUE, STALBANS
[Officer contact : Marcos Martos - HiguerasTel : 01992 556229]
[Councillor C A Mitchell declared a personal interest as she was a Member of the Education & Skills Cabinet Panel, she left the Council Chamber and took no part in the discussion and voting on this application which had been considered by that Cabinet Panel.]
In response to a question, the Head of the County Development Unit, Environment & Commercial Services Department, stated that she would enquire whether it was proposed to provide lighting for the new footpath on the northern side of the site linking through to Marshall Avenue in the interests of safety of older pupilsusing this new footpath.
RESOLVED
That, for the reasons set out in the report, the Director of Environment and Commercial Services be authorised to grant planning permission for proposed new single storey extension to create a 3FE junior school, including a new 33 space car park and 27 new 1 metre high light columns at Bernards Heath Junior School, Watson Avenue, St.Albans subject to conditions to include:
a)time limit
b)marking out of the replacement playing pitches prior to the commencement of the development.
c)playing field quality
d)phasing of the development
e)hours of working
f)wheel/ chassis cleaning
g)contractor parking and compound area
h)method of construction for the car park
i)approved plans
j)car parking
k)protection of existing trees
l)tree planting
m)lighting scheme
n)lighting use
o)method of construction for the lighting
p)bicycle storage provision
q)development to be carried out in accordance with the amended Flood Risk Assessment, together with proposed mitigation for surface water run-off and use of permeable parking areas, filter drains and underground attenuation to ensure no uncontrolled run-off
7. DACORUM BOROUGH - APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED NEW DETACHED SINGLESTOREYPRE-SCHOOLBUILDING WITH EXTERNAL PLAY AREA AND THE PROVISION OF 8 NEW CAR PARKING SPACES AT MARKYATE PRIMARY SCHOOL, CAVENDISH ROAD, MARKYATE
[Officer contact : Rob EganTel : 01992 556224]
A Committee Member drew attention and thanked officers for taking into account members wishes for the development incorporating a replanting scheme involving the provision of, at least twice, the number of trees to be removed.
In response to a question, the Monitoring & Enforcement Manager, County Development Unit, Environment & Commercial Services Department, stated that